Immediate weight-bearing is safe following lateral locked plate fixation of periprosthetic distal femoral fractures

Double plating is a suitable option for periprosthetic distal femur fracture compared to single plate fixation and distal femoral arthroplasty

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare reoperation and revision rates of double plating (DP), single plating using a lateral locking plate (SP), or distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) for the treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures (PDFFs).

Methods

All patients with PDFF primarily treated with DP, SP, or DFA between 2008 and 2022 at a university teaching hospital were included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome was revision surgery for failure following DP, SP, or DFA. Secondary outcome measures included any reoperation, length of hospital stay, and mortality. All basic demographic and relevant implant and injury details were collected. Radiological analysis included fracture classification and evaluation of metaphyseal and medial comminution.

Results

A total of 111 PDFFs (111 patients, median age 82 years (interquartile range (IQR) 75 to 88), 86% female) with 32 (29%) Su classification 1, 37 (34%) Su 2, and 40 (37%) Su 3 fractures were included. The median follow-up was 2.5 years (IQR 1.2 to 5.0). DP, SP, and DFA were used in 15, 66, and 30 patients, respectively. Compared to SP, patients treated with DP were more likely to have metaphyseal comminution (47% vs 14%; p = 0.009), to be low fractures (47% vs 11%; p = 0.009), and to be anatomically reduced (100% vs 71%; p = 0.030). Patients selected for DFA displayed comparable amounts of medial/metaphyseal comminution as those who underwent DP. At a minimum follow-up of two years, revision surgery for failure was performed in 11 (9.9%) cases at a median of five months (IQR 2 to 9): 0 DP patients (0%), 9 SP (14%), and 2 DFA (6.7%) (p = 0.249).

Conclusion

Using a strategy of DP fixation in fractures, where the fracture was low but there was enough distal bone to accommodate locking screws, and where there is metaphyseal comminution, resulted in equivalent survival free from revision or reoperation compared to DFA and SP fixation.

Weightbearing versus non-weight bearing in geriatric distal femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Demographics of patients who sustain geriatric distal femoral fractures (DFF) match those of patients with neck-of-femur fractures but have limited evidence with which to support post-operative weightbearing protocols.

PURPOSE

This systematic review sought to identify any difference in outcomes for elderly patients with DFF who were allowed early versus delayed weightbearing postoperatively.

METHODS

DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library, reference lists of retrieved articles.

STUDY SELECTION

English language papers published between January 2010 and February 2023 with AO-OTA type 33A, B and C femoral fractures as well as Lewis and Rorabeck Type I and II periprosthetic DFF surgically treated with either a lateral locking plate or retrograde intramedullary nail and an average patient age of ≥ 60 years.

DATA EXTRACTION

Studies were assessed for inclusion by two authors and quality was assessed using the MINORS tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixteen studies were included, Meta-analysis of non-union, malunion, infection, delayed union and implant complications was performed using Microsoft Excel and the MetaXL extension. The data on return to mobility were presented in narrative form. The analyses demonstrated no difference between the early and delayed weightbearing groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no significant differences in complication rates between early versus delayed weightbearing after surgery for DFF in an elderly population. The study results are limited by high heterogeneity and low-quality studies. High quality, prospective studies are needed to determine the ideal postoperative weightbearing protocol.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level III studies. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration-Prospero CRD42022371460.

Optimizing periprosthetic fracture management and in-hospital outcome: insights from the PIPPAS multicentric study of 1387 cases in Spain

BACKGROUND

The incidence of all periprosthetic fractures (PPF), which require complex surgical treatment associated with high morbidity and mortality, is predicted to increase. The evolving surgical management has created a knowledge gap regarding its impact on immediate outcomes. This study aimed to describe current management strategies for PPF and their repercussions for in-hospital outcomes as well as to evaluate their implications for the community.

METHODS

PIPPAS (Peri-Implant PeriProsthetic Survival Analysis) was a prospective multicentre observational study of 1387 PPF performed during 2021. Descriptive statistics summarized the epidemiology, fracture characteristics, management, and immediate outcomes. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was employed to evaluate potential predictors of in-hospital mortality, complications, discharge status, and weight-bearing restrictions.

RESULTS

The study encompassed 32 (2.3%) shoulder, 4 (0.3%) elbow, 751 (54.1%) hip, 590 (42.5%) knee, and 10 (0.7%) ankle PPF. Patients were older (median 84 years, IQR 77-89), frail [median clinical frailty scale (CFS) 5, IQR 3-6], presented at least one comorbidity [median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) 5, IQR 4-7], were community dwelling (81.8%), and had outdoor ambulation ability (65.6%). Femoral knee PPF were most frequently associated with uncemented femoral components, while femoral hip PPF occurred equally in cemented and uncemented stems. Patients were managed surgically (82%), with co-management (73.9%), through open approaches (85.9%) after almost 4 days (IQR, 51.9-153.6 h), with prosthesis revision performed in 33.8% of femoral hip PPF and 6.5% of femoral knee PPF. For half of the patients, the discharge instructions mandated weight-bearing restrictions. In-hospital mortality rates were 5.2% for all PPF and 6.2% for femoral hip PPF. Frailty, age > 84 years, mild cognitive impairment, CFS > 3, CCI > 3, and non-geriatric involvement were candidate predictors for in-hospital mortality, medical complications, and discharge to a nursing care facility. Management involving revision arthroplasty by experienced surgeons favoured full weight-bearing, while an open surgical approach favoured weight-bearing restrictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Current arthroplasty fixation check and revision rates deviate from established guidelines, yet full weight-bearing is favoured. A surgical delay of over 100 h and a lack of geriatric co-management were related to in-hospital mortality and medical complications. This study recommends judicious hypoaggressive approaches. Addressing complications and individualizing the surgical strategy can lead to enhanced functional outcomes, alleviating the economic and social burdens upon hospital discharge. Level of Evidence Level IV case series.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04663893), protocol ID: PI 20-2041.

[High revision rates and mortality after treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures with a distal femur replacement : An analysis from the EPRD]

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic distal femoral fractures (PDFF) are challenging injuries, as mostly geriatric patients with serious comorbidities are affected. Revision to a distal femoral replacement (DFR) is often the best option in very distal fractures, poor bone stock and/or loose total knee replacement. Data on outcome after these surgeries is limited.

OBJECTIVES

This study was initiated to analyze the outcome after distal femoral replacement for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) were analyzed. From a total of 43,945 revision knee replacement surgeries in the registry, 629 patients could be identified with a PDFF in which a DFR was used for revision. The mean age was 79.1 years, and 84.1% were female. Revisions and mortality were analyzed and compared with patient groups with a similar procedure (revision total knee arthroplasty) or similar general condition (fracture hip replacement). To make the groups more comparable, matched-pair-analyses were performed that included age, gender, BMI and comorbidities as matching parameters.

RESULTS

Within 1 year after surgery 17.1% of the patients died and 10.4% were revised. Within 4 years 35.5% died and 22.3% were revised. Revision rates were lower in elective knee revisions (1 year 6.0%, 4 years 16.8%). Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) accounted for 50% of all revisions, resulting a PJI rate of 7.3%. Mortality after DFR was similarly high as after fracture hip arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

After DFR for PDFF every third patient died, and every fifth patient needed revision within 4 years after surgery, which demonstrates the severity of this injury. Efforts should be undertaken to provide optimal treatment to these high-risk patients to reduce unfavorable outcomes. Surgeries should be well prepared and performed as early as possible in hospitals with adequate experience.

High revision rates and mortality after distal femoral replacement for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures: analysis from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD)

PURPOSE

This study was initiated to analyze the outcome after distal femoral replacement (DFR) for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures (PDFF).

METHODS

Data from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) were analyzed. A total of 626 patients could be identified with a DFR for PDFF. Mean age was 78.8 years, and 84.2% were female. Revisions and mortality were analyzed and compared with patient groups with a similar procedure (revision total knee arthroplasty) or similar general condition (fracture total hip arthroplasty, hip hemiarthroplasty). Matched-pair-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Within one year after surgery, 13.2% of the patients had died and further 9.4% were revised. Within four years, 32.7% had died and 19.7% were revised. Revisions were nearly twice as high as in the comparison groups. Periprosthetic infection (PJI) was the most frequent cause for revision, resulting in a PJI rate of 12.8%, which was lower in the comparison groups. Mortality after DFR was as similar high as after fracture hip arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

PDFF are a serious injury, and the necessary surgical treatment has a high risk of complications. Every third patient after DFR for PDFF had died and every fifth patient needed revision within 4 years after surgery. Efforts should be undertaken to provide optimal treatment to these high-risk patients to reduce unfavorable outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

REGISTRATION OF CLINICAL TRIALS

As this is a registry-derived study of data of the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD), no registration was performed.

Weight-bearing Restrictions after Distal Femur Fractures - Review of Current Literature

The incidence of distal femur fractures increases in the geriatric patient. The primary treatment goal in these fractures is early mobilisation to prevent secondary injuries associated with immobility. In light of the increasing spectrum of therapeutic options for postoperative fracture treatment, including double plating, nail-plate combination and distal femur replacement as postoperative treatments, weight-bearing recommendations are becoming increasingly important. The aim of this study was thus to analyse the weight-bearing recommendations and associated therapy results within the literature of the past 9 years and compare the recommendations to our own approach.

Weight-bearing Guidelines for Common Geriatric Upper and Lower Extremity Fractures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review paper is to summarize current weight-bearing guidelines for common geriatric fractures, around weight-bearing joints, of the upper and lower extremities.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is an increasing amount of literature investigating the safety and efficacy of early weight-bearing in geriatric fractures, particularly of the lower extremity. Many recent studies, although limited, suggest that early weight-bearing may be safe for geriatric distal femur and ankle fractures. Given the limited data pertaining to early weight-bearing in geriatric fractures, it is difficult to establish concrete weight-bearing guidelines in this population. However, in the literature available, early weight-bearing appears to be safe and effective across most injuries. The degree and time to weight-bearing vary significantly based on fracture type and treatment method. Future studies investigating postoperative weight-bearing protocols should focus on the growing geriatric population and identify methods to address specific barriers to early weight-bearing in these patients such as cognitive impairment, dependence on caregivers, and variations in post-acute disposition.

Periprosthetic Fractures After a Total Knee Arthroplasty

As the number of total knee arthroplasties performed continues to increase, complications such as postoperative periprosthetic fractures are becoming increasingly more common. Femoral periprosthetic fractures are the most common type of fractures around a total knee arthroplasty, whereas tibial and patellar periprosthetic fractures are infrequent. Treatment principles depend on the bone the fracture is located, the status of the implant fixation, bone stock, and the type of implants available. The Vancouver classification allows for a standardized system to describe and manage these injuries, incorporating these factors. A systematic approach is vital in obtaining the best possible outcomes because complications and mortality rates mimic those of hip fractures.

Surgical approaches to periprosthetic femoral fractures for plate fixation or revision arthroplasty

Periprosthetic femoral fractures are increasing in incidence, and typically occur in frail elderly patients. They are similar to pathological fractures in many ways. The aims of treatment are the same, including 'getting it right first time' with a single operation, which allows immediate unrestricted weightbearing, with a low risk of complications, and one that avoids the creation of stress risers locally that may predispose to further peri-implant fracture. The surgical approach to these fractures, the associated soft-tissue handling, and exposure of the fracture are key elements in minimizing the high rate of complications. This annotation describes the approaches to the femur that can be used to facilitate the surgical management of peri- and interprosthetic fractures of the femur at all levels using either modern methods of fixation or revision arthroplasty.

Application of Cortical Bone Plate Allografts Combined with Less Invasive Stabilization System (LISS) Plates in Fixation of Comminuted Distal Femur Fractures

Background and Objectives: At present, the management of comminuted distal femur fractures remains challenging for orthopedic surgeons. The aim of this study is to report a surgical treatment for comminuted distal femur fractures using supplementary medial cortical bone plate allografts in conjunction with the lateral less invasive stabilization system (LISS) plates. Materials and Methods: From January 2009 to January 2014, the records of thirty-three patients who underwent supplementary medial cortical bone plate allografts combined with lateral LISS plates fixation were reviewed. Clinical and radiographic data were collected during regular postoperative follow-up visits. Functional outcomes were determined according to the special surgery knee rating scale (HSS) used at the hospital. Results: Thirty patients were followed for 13 to 73 months after surgery, with an average follow-up time of 31.3 months. The mean time to bone union was 5.4 months (range of 3-12 months) and the mean range of knee flexion was 105.6° (range of 80-130°). Of the remaining patients, 10 had a score of "Excellent", while 10 had a score of "Good". Three patients had superficial or deep infections, one patient had nonunion that required bone grafting, and one patient had post-traumatic knee arthritis. Conclusions: Based on these promising results, we propose that supplementary medial cortical bone plate allografts combined with lateral LISS plate fixation may be a good treatment option for comminuted distal femur fractures. This treatment choice not only resulted in markedly improved stability on the medial side of the femur, but also satisfactory outcomes for distal femoral fractures.

Fractures after cephalomedullary nailing of the femur : Systematization of surgical fixation based on the analysis of a single-center retrospective cohort

PURPOSES

Femoral implant related fractures (IRF) are a growing pathology in an increasingly elderly and frail population. A series of IRF after cephalomedullary nail (CMN) fixation of a femoral fracture is analyzed and an algorithm described to guide the management of such fractures.

METHODS

All eligible patients operated on for IRF fixation after CMN were reviewed regarding their demographics, comorbidities, injury pattern, and treatment. Primary outcomes were mortality and local complications. Secondary outcomes were time to consolidation, time to weight-bearing initiation, length of hospitalization, and discharge destination.

RESULTS

The incidence of IRF requiring fixation was 1.3% after 3401 CMN implantation procedures. Elderly women with comorbidities and plate fixation predominated. One-year mortality was 18.6%, being higher for patients presenting with infection and those unable to walk at the end of follow-up. Local complications occurred in 25.6%. Median time to weight-bearing was 9.1 weeks, but longer for patients with plate fixation or complications. Patients presenting with an infection and those discharged to nursing facilities had more comorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Following an algorithm presented here, patients were treated either with nail exchange or lateral locking plate fixation, permitting straightforward evaluations and acceptable results in a very high-risk population.